quote:Since the team failed to make a qualifying offer they are limited in what they can offer him in free agency to the amount that that the qualifying offer would have been ($3.7 million a season).

This is inaccurate. They are limited to an exception if they are over the cap, but if they aren't over they cap they can sign him to whatever the team can afford. It's a bit of a moot point though because Aminu will be lucky if he gets $3.7 million.

Aminu has not developed like projected and thats why the Clippers were willing to part ways with him instead of Bledsoe... I was of the belief that he was a great inclusion in the package at the time and that he would develop into a possible Luol Dent type player with the above average ability to defend, rebound, and average 12-15 points with a respectable three point shot.

While he is a decent rebounder, an ok defender (depending on who is guarding), his offensive game has not developed nearly to the level of what he seems to be physically capable of. He can't shoot, his demeanor is too lethargic and aloof at times, and he is a non threat on offense most nights. He is too inconsistent and he may have maxed out his abilities now.

He definitely needs to come off the bench and I would only resign for the qualifying offer. He probably will get a better offer from other teams so he would leave. His production is definitely replaceable and his type is a dime a dozen right now. Otto Porter is better than him Day one and he is not a sure thing either. I held out for the longest but I thin its time for the Aminu experience to end, time for a new look at SF. We need scoring from that position along with a defender. Davis should not have to be counted on for scoring on a championship contender team.

Were only a few pieces away from being a solid playoff team and it really starts with upgrading the SF position significantly. Aminu is not the answer...

Teams have until the October 31 preceding the player’s second regular season to exercise their option for the player’s third season. Likewise, they have until the October 31 preceding the player’s third regular season to exercise their option for the player’s fourth season. If the team declines either option, then the player enters free agency as an unrestricted free agent.

However, if the team declines either option and the player becomes a free agent, the team cannot re-sign him to a salary greater than he would have received had the team exercised its option. In other words, teams can’t decline an option year in order to get around the rookie salary scale and give the player more money. This applies to all types of signing, including the Bird exception, the Mid-Level exception, and cap room.

As a result, the Hornets cannot offer Aminu more than $3.7 million for the 2013-14 season, the amount that he would have received under his player option for next season.

I know that's what Larry Coon said in some chat, but his own CBAFAQ suggests Aminu falls under the Non Bird Exception that allows teams to resign their own Free Agents. I can't think of any reason why the players or the owners would agree to the limitation you cited for teams that aren't over the cap. Players wouldn't vote for something that limits their pay and owners wouldn't vote for something that limits their ability to keep their own players, so it just seems unfathomable that the rule would exist unless it was part of a salary cap exception.

quote: NON-BIRD EXCEPTION -- This is also a component of the Veteran Free Agent exception. Its name is somewhat of a misnomer, since Non-Bird really is a form of Bird rights. Players who qualify for this exception are called "Non-Qualifying Veteran Free Agents" in the CBA. They are veteran free agents who are neither Qualifying Veteran Free Agents nor Early Qualifying Veteran Free Agents, and include the following:

Players who finished the season with a given team, who have played no more than one season without clearing waivers or changing teams as a free agent. Players who were Early Bird free agents, but whose team renounced its right to use the Early Bird exception to re-sign the player. Players who were to be Larry Bird or Early Bird free agents, were playing on one-year contracts, and were traded mid-season.

This exception allows a team to re-sign its own free agent to a salary starting at up to 120% of his salary in the previous season2 (not over the maximum salary, of course), 120% of the minimum salary, or the amount needed to tender a qualifying offer (if the player is a restricted free agent -- see question number 43), whichever is greater. Raises are limited to 4.5% of the salary in the first year of the contract, and contracts are limited to four seasons when this exception is used.

A partial season counts as a full season for the tenure calculation related to Bird rights. If a team signs another team's free agent to a rest-of-season contract mid-way through the season, then at the end of that season the player is a non-Bird free agent.

Starting January 10 of each season, this exception begins to reduce in value. See question number 26 for details.

As a PF, maybe. But he has no offensive skills and is a horrible ball handler. If the team wasn't already set with Davis and Anderson, and the fact you can find a back-up PF (that can rebound just as well) pretty cheap, I'd be all for bringing him back. But it's time to give up the experiment. I just wish they could have got something for him before he moves on (like a 2nd rounder)..

He does deserves a raise as long as it is not out of this world. But you never know, I mean Benson did just extend Monty with a horrible raise with a resume that leads much to be desired for 4 more years,